When it’s the police committing a crime, who do you call?
This was my column in The Malta Independent, last Thursday.
The man in the photograph is Police Sergeant Ramon Mifsud Grech, who has been reprimanded twice for being drunk while on duty, and who is one of the police officers in the ‘wrong charge sheet’ case. The woman, it goes almost without saying, is not his wife.
I am so glad that the police have decided to prosecute anew the three police officers and one nightclub bouncer who stood accused of having assaulted and beaten a French student.
They was after they tried to force him to delete photographs he had taken of them drinking together at a Paceville bar while on duty.
The four, as we all know by now, were let off because of a mistake in the time and day on the police charge sheet. The magistrate had no choice but to find them not guilty, because when a person is found guilty, it is of having committed X crime at Y time on Z day, and not of having committed X crime in general.
As soon as I read the reports, I realised that the same logical reasoning which led to their acquittal could be used to have them brought to trial again.
It would not be classed as double jeopardy – the law in civilised countries does not permit a person to be tried twice for the same crime – because including the correct time and date would make it a different crime.
This was the technical and procedural rationale for letting them off, so it should be the technical and procedural rationale for prosecuting them with the right time and day.
I was concerned that the police would not do this, because it struck me that the police officer who prepared the charge sheet might well have included the wrong time and day deliberately, as a way of saving his colleagues from conviction.
I have met some decent and honest police officers over the years, but have also had more than a few awful experiences which convinced me that corruption, abuse, unethical behaviour and malpractice are rampant in the force and that standards are so low that some police officers seem to think lying and abuse are normal and acceptable as long as you achieve your objectives.
I have even seen police officers lying under oath, blatantly, without being reprimanded by the magistrate hearing them – two different magistrates.
One case involved me, when the entire contingent of officers from Spinola police station was shepherded to court, wasting an entire morning of police time, to testify falsely under oath that I had threatened their superior and virtually assaulted him (yet they didn’t arrest me on the spot, strangely enough).
It was obvious to everyone in the courtroom, the magistrate included, that they’d turned up in full force and with great enthusiasm only because it was me (the ruddy Mintoffjani). Even the ticket about which I’d complained had been issued abusively and deliberately didn’t carry the issuing officer’s number so I couldn’t make a specific complaint.
One daft policewoman, while still on the witness stand, turned to her superior when she’d finished with her false oath, and said, in a voice heard by the entire courtroom, “Hux hekk ghidtli biex nghid, sir?”
Twit.
Then I testified, denied everything and said that I had never seen these people except for the police officer who said I’d threatened him. And I hadn’t threatened him. I had merely objected to being issued with a ticket for parking beneath a ‘no parking between 0900 and 1200′ sign when I had parked there at 1215.
Perhaps my mistake was to ask, in a very annoyed tone, whether there are police officers who actually believe 1200 hours to signify midnight rather than noon.
The magistrate dismissed the case but failed to order the investigation of these police officers for clearly lying under oath. He didn’t so much as reprimand them.
The second case involved an elderly couple who were accosted by a police officer as they parked for a little while in a no-parking zone so as to help their son out of the car and into a building. The couple were in their 70s, the woman a tiny, frail little thing. Their son was in his 40s, large, heavy, unable to move properly and mentally disabled.
These two old people had to physically help him along wherever they went. In this case, the husband had stopped the car to drop off his son and help his wife take their son into the building, where she would wait with him while his father returned to the car to park it properly.
The police officer, instead of doing the decent thing and giving them a hand when he saw them struggling and they explained their problem, insisted that they move along and then filed charges against the man for resisting his orders, assaulting him, swearing at him and the rest.
I had yet to see in the witness dock a man less likely to assault a police officer and swear at him. The magistrate found the man guilty of resisting police orders, which is technically correct but morally absurd, but didn’t reprimand the police officer who clearly lied under oath, stuttered, hemmed and hawed, and contradicted himself.
Now it seems that even the police commissioner and the president of the republic appear concerned that some kind of abuse might have been involved in the preparation of that charge sheet which has been in the news, for they have both spoken out.
The president was circumspect, speaking of how care should to be taken to avoid mistakes and how the public is upset at such things, and so on. But the fact that he spoke at all, when he rarely pronounces himself on contentious issues, is enough.
The police commissioner was more specific, saying that there is an investigation into whether these were genuine mistakes or real abuse. How they are going to work that out without a confession is beyond me. How do you prove that a mistake was not a mistake at all, but deliberate?
I think at least one of the police officers, Ramon Mifsud Grech, should be sacked anyway, whether the mistake was really a mistake or not. He noticed the error in the charge sheet at the outset, and admitted to the newspapers that he didn’t point it out because “I’m not going to point out something that goes against my interests.”
Aside from his wrong use of the negative – he should have said that he’s not going to point out something that is IN his interest – what sort of attitude is this for a police officer? It is the attitude of a criminal.
An innocent man would wish to prove his innocence and not seek to be let off on a technicality. Also, this is just the attitude I have described, in which certain police officers really do seem to believe that the end justifies the means, however abusive, illegal and unethical those means are.
In this situation, Ramon Mifsud Grech was in duty bound, as a police officer, to draw attention to the mistake on the charge sheet even if, as the accused, it was to his detriment.
This man, Mifsud Grech, has been severely reprimanded by his seniors for being caught drunk on duty twice. Yet he was promoted to the rank of sergeant.
He says that Jean-Oliver Mesrine, who was in his early 20s when he photographed Mifsud Grech and his colleagues drinking at a Paceville bar while in uniform and on duty, invented the whole story.
But why would a French student, here in Malta on holiday, bother doing something like that? His story was corroborated by his friend, who witnessed the whole episode, and the two of them picked out the offending officers in an identity parade.
I believe Jean-Oliver Mesrine and not Ramon Mifsud Grech, his fellow officers and the nightclub bouncer. This is not only because his story has the ring of authenticity about it and because he had no motive for inventing an episode like this while on holiday – rather a disincentive, I would think – but also because I myself have been the victim of police abuse and lying under oath.
Why, I even had three senior police officers trying to physically force open – an act that is against the law in itself – the gate of my home, then leave the siren on their official car blaring for half an hour to flush me out, which is also against the law (disturbing the peace and harassment). All this to serve me with a summons less than 24 hours before the court sitting, which is also against the law, which lays down a minimum of 48 hours.
Earlier in the year, another contingent of police officers stood at my gate until I returned home at 1.30am – against the law, because the police cannot come to your door between sunset and sunrise unless you are actually murdering somebody there and then and they have to rescue your victim – to summon me to Police HQ in seven-and-a-half hours’ time, at 9am.
And all this because the magistrate on whose request the prosecution was being held had had a long affair with a very senior police officer, and strings were being pulled for the law to be broken and abuse to take place.
In situations like this, who do you call? Well, you certainly can’t call the police, can you.
36 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
At the Qawra police station they actually have a ‘Big Head’ who specialises in frame-ups.
Ooopps, I blew the whistle.
He deems himself to be the James Bond type.
No, this one is a wife beater.
I had little trust in the police force before reading your article – and now, of course, I have even less. They harm the very people they swore to protect.
TO SERVE AND PROTECT. Reminds me of a condom.
Domine dirige nos – yes, my foot.
The motto – which must have been copied from The City of London – is completely inappropriate, if not blasphemous… blaming God for their corruption!
(Unless, domine refers not to God but to some other lord …)
You should be in prison now Daphne by the way Times readers suggest.
I keep reading in The Times about assaults on the police and I always suspected these are made up charges.
I rarely hear of assaults on police in London, mainly because the police are better trained, more polite and know how to handle a potentially explosive situation.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120512/local/Drunk-driver-hit-an-officer.419378
A Camilleri
Today, 09:59
i would have thought punching a policeman carries a prison sentence and not a suspended one, not even counting the drink drive charge.
Paul Busuttil
Today, 09:50
Hitting a Police officer should have a mandatory minimum jail term it is akin to hitting the president!
Someone once told me that they are nothing but thugs in uniform. Of course I totally disagree .
But what I agree with, is that to be respected one has to deserve it.
I wish to add that this is one reason why I hate the PN, for failing to sort out the police force.
They had a lot of time to reform the police force but failed miserably. It is the most important institution in a democracy.
Paul ma ghandu x jaqsam xejn li qed tghid. Iva hemm bosta abbuzi fil korp ghax ma hemmx hafna power checks u l hazin dejjem jibqa imma apparti dawn il hnizrijiet, fi zmien il labour kien hemm hnizrijiet politici frame ups politici qtil fid depot….
U hafna minnhom tawhom promotions wara li telgha l-PN jew hallewhom jitilqu qabel ma kien hemm sentenza mill-qorti kontrihom.
Jien li kont dejjem nadif bqajt kif dhalt, pulizija. Mhux talli hekk talli daru fuq demmi ghax lili ma setghu jaghmluli xejn.
Tmur ghal ghajnuna ghand il-Min. KMB u ssib il-bibien maghluqin.
Kultant ghandu ragun Franco Debono dwar dak li jghid fuq KMB! Issa jumejn ohra kollha jigu jhabbtu l-bieb imma din id-darba ghalxejn.
F’Malta mill-partiti jew tkun ittibrat ahmar jew blu imma qatt ma tkun ittimbrat li tkun tivvota skond kif thoss li mar il-pajjiz u int f’dik il-legislatura u jekk int ahmar jew blu uliedek se jirtu l-kulur tieghek. Xi zball ghandhom.
Xemx li ma ssahhanx ahjar il-bard ta Jannar minnha.
Il-Kummissarju Rizzo hu kaz eklatanti ta’ pulizija li ma messux baqa’ fil-korp, wisq u wisq anqas jitlahhaq Kummissarju … Min jaf x’gara minn wara l-kwinti …
Xi darba xi hadd imissu jikteb il-Hajja tal-Kummissarju Rizzo.
I fully agree with paddy and Mario above. The police force needs an external body to reform it, it cannot carry out a reform by itself. External, possibly foreign consultants need to be employed to implement reforms.
To me this case does not make sense. The accused had confirmed many issues such as the persons involved, the photographic of the police, the non beating, so this was a cast iron case except for the time. It seems to me that law does not follow logic and so it is quite easy for the police to make so called mistakes.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120512/local/Ex-officer-assaulted-Nigerian-girlfriend.419383
Shame on some of the magistrates that preside in court. They know very well when witnesses are lying and yet they do nothing.
I had a case and was left fuming, as all the witnesses were lying and the bastard knew it.
He had the nerve to even rub salt in my wound.
I have another sitting in July against the police and they are all lying and they dragged my friend and me to court for reporting them to their superiors.
The sergeant is the ringleader in this case. I had trust in them until this happened to me.
Now I never believe what they say and my faith in them will never be restored.
I am not hopeful at all about the outcome of the case, and expect to go there and listen to a bunch of liars in uniform.
Great read! Good to know I am not the only one thinking that this institution is anything but delivering its purpose. Had a dismal experience recently where I, as a victim to a crime, expected more cooperation and less BS from them.
All laws are subject to interpretation and judges and magistrates have enough sense, at least most of them, to evaluate facts and situations.
Hence no law aought to bar them from deciding on whether they should grant bail, imprison someone etc.
Should it eventually be proven that a member of the judiciary did abuse of power, then it’s up to parliament to debar the person. Then if they dont they would be fit for the opera house.
magna cum laude?
Ghostbusters?
Alan Grech Photography thanks you for the free publicity.
Oops..sorry, I posted this here by mistake, it should be under your Twistees article.
Daphne, where can we see the photo of Police Sergeant Ramon Mifsud Grech?
I blame all this on the gutless PN administration. They had far too much time to sort the police force out.
Guido de Marco as the first PN justice minister after 1987, failed abysmally to reform the police force which he inherited from the MLP. He wanted reconciliation, you cannot reconcile with thugs in uniform, reconciliation wont change his behaviour.
[Daphne – You’re wrong on that score (reconciliation, that is). Always remember that Guido de Marco was Malta’s foremost criminal lawyer and that his stock-in-trade was criminals and the police. When you’re dealing with the police on a regular basis in your private business, you can’t afford to upset them in your public life. Also, there may have been favours owed and information gained. He may have stopped practising when he became a minister, but his firm did not. Enough said, because I do not really like discussing those who are recently dead, though largely out of concern for the living.]
I understand and agree with your reasoning. You made it clearer. It seems that the police force cannot be reformed.
Daphne, ilqatt il-musmar fuq rasu hemm.
Alla hares ma kienx hemm dik l-informazzjoni ghax kieku frame-ups u irregularijiet ohra kienu jibqu mistura.
My neighbour pushed my daughter’s car into a third party’s. Having a witness who saw it all, I reported it to the police and the case went to court.
The case disintegrated because of a mistake in the charges. My neighbour’s daughter married a cop.
Coincidence?
QUOTE:
This was my column in The Malta Independent, last Thursday.
The man in the photograph is Police Sergeant Ramon Mifsud Grech, who has been reprimanded twice for being drunk while on duty, and who is one of the police officers in the ‘wrong charge sheet’ case. The woman, it goes almost without saying, is not his wife.
Unquote.
WHERE IS THE PHOTO?????
[Daphne – Apologies – just uploaded it.]
They was after they tried to force him to delete photographs he had taken of them drinking together at a Paceville bar while on duty.
Daphne there was a another case a few months ago, when a charity worker had his garage blocked by a parked car, he kept calling the police to have it removed.
He was later falsely charged with racism. This man works with African children. The police officer who charged him failed to appear in court.
This proves Franco Debono right in most of what he claims about the Ministry of (In)-Justice.
[Daphne – It does NOT prove Franco Debono right. Franco Debono, like all other criminal lawyers, is loath to upset the police and never actually said anything about them. It’s the courts he does on about, not the police. We have separation of powers, remember. Also, Keith Marshall is not a charity worker. He is a pharmacist and a medical rep who does some voluntary work in his spare time.]
Id-dixxiplina fil-korp tal-Pulizija spiccat.
Jekk is-surgent nizzel il-hin hazin fir-rapport kellu jigi iddixplinat hu ukoll. Dan l-ghagir itik x’tifhem li din l-istorja tkun grat darba ohra u kollox baqa’ ghaddej.
Fil-Pulizija hemm ufficjali stess li jaghtu pariri x’ghandu jitnizzel fir-rapport biex certu nies jigu illiberati.
U hemm ukoll hafna hbiberiji ma’ certi avukati. Hawn hafna nies jghidulek li il-Pulizija stess li investigawhom u jakkozawhom jissugerulhom ghand liema avukat ghandhom imorru.
Dawn x’affarijiet huma?
Riya, so the police hunt for clients for lawyers. Incredible, yet plausible.
[Daphne – Yes, it does happen. I know that for a fact. Somebody gets arrested and has no lawyer, and policeman X or Y ‘finds’ one for him. One assumes they get a kickback, otherwise why would they bother.]
Now they’re turning to village lawyers which are Labour’s new candidates for the coming election.
@ Mario.
Ghandek ragun habib.
Pulizija rinomati laburisti estremi jiehdu trasferiment fejn ikunu komdi u x’hin iridu.
Ohrajn, ghax forsi ta’ opinjoni politika differenti, u anke bi skapitu ta’ laburisti, jintbaghtu jahdmu gewwa distretti fejn l-ghassa hija immexxija minn surgenti laburisti u li ma’ jridu jaghmlu xejn.
Jien naf b’kaz, li gewwa certi distretti anke spetturi talbu li jigu trasferiti minhabba l-poter u dominanza li ghandhom certi surgenti. Dawn gewwa l-ghassa tal-pulizija , u fix-xoghol tal-pulizija, jaghmlu dak li jridu huma.
Il-Kummissarju nahseb li jaf li fid-distretti m’ghandux kontroll. Pero’ dan mhux sew fir-rigward tal-polplu Malti u Ghawdxi li jhallas ghal pagi ta’ dawn l-istess Pulizija.
Il-Pulizija qieghda hemm biex tara li c-cittadin ikun prottett kif suppost u mhux biex certa pulizija jittrattaw lin-nies kif iridu huma jew kif jaqblilhom.
Il-Ministru KMB ghandu id-dover u l-obligu li jara li l-Kumissarju jmexxi il-Pulizija b’gustizza ugwali, u mhux meta jinqala xi kaz jara kif jaghmel u jitfa domandi li hadd m’hu kapaci jirrispodijhom.
Dan is-surgent Ramon ilu jaghmel kummidji inkluz mal-familja.
Jekk ghandu problema m’ghandux jehel ic-cittadin jew it-turist innocenti ma’ rasu.
Id-dover li nies bhal dawn ma’ jibqghux fil-korp tal-Pulizija hija tal-Kummissarju u oltre minn hekk tal-Ministru li huwa totalment responsabbli mill-Korp..
I guess, .. is this proof enough?
Hello,
I agree completely with your article, but there is a tiny grammatical error you might want to fix:
“They was after..”
I think you meant to say: “It was after”, or “They did so after..”
:)